“Relying on those hobbyists to put American astronauts into space is like waiting for the dead to rise up from their graves. You are all betting on a dead horse!”

And yet multiple Presidents and multiple Congresses have stated that we need more commercial space participation, and the NASA Authorization & Appropriation laws last year specifically stated that commercial crew was to be the primary method of getting U.S. astronauts to the ISS (the MPCV was only a backup).

So howl at the wind all you want Chris, you’re not going to change what’s happening.

“Spaceflight, especially human flying, and particularly the grand out-of-LEO variety, is simply TOO difficult & complex for mere commercial firms to initiate and carry out to fruition.”

Yes, the companies that design and build all of NASA’s hardware are too dumb and stupid to know how to use them. Gee, if only everyone would realize that…

What a maroon.

” Shut up and fly.”

another goofy post.

ROFLMAOPIP there’s nothing ‘goofy’ about the truth being matter-of-factly stated. And it merits reiteration to the ‘goofy’ commerical space community that cranks and begs about everything but fails to do the one thing necessary to establish credibility: “shut up and fly.”

“Ron: a lot of the anger, acrimony, and bitterness could’ve been avoided. ”

sure if Obama had only had the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders there ready to pose with all who are losing their jobs… with free food for whoever wanted it then everyone who was losing their technowelfare job would have felt far better about it…

the only thing that was going to keep people who are losing their technowelfare job happy about it is to get another technowelfare job…and if we did that then there is no money to save for real technology programs.

you are moving into Wind status RGO

What should have Hall asked His Majesty Musk? Plenty. First, besides NASA, does he have any customers for his proposed service re: HSF lined up? Second, does he have any plans to undercut NASA’s BEO activities or offer BEO exploration under contract to NASA? Third, what did he mean by that “retiring on Mars” nonsense exactly? Fourth, what are your plans in case NASA doesn’t choose Space X for crew services? And no doubt others would’ve arisen. ”

You are becoming a troll…but sometimes I enjoy engaging the weak.

in order? “Congressman that is not any of your business, we are a private free enterprise company, do you ask other companies what other business they have?” Second question “Undercut what? What BEO activities so far they have a power point rocket and capsule that they cannot even find a powerpoint mission for”

Third “Retiring on Mars? What did I mean, go read the statement it is in English”

Fourth? “Launch satellites, I have a pretty good backorder of those. As for Dragon? Well I have said before I intend to develop it on private money if necessary”

Now wasnt that easy? And All I did was glue together statements already in the public record with a little snark on question three.

Dont be goofy RGO

Goodness, what stupid questions. Fortunately, Hall isn’t that idiotic.

“Said it before, and I’ll repeat: If NASA can get two commercial providers to handle the ISS cargo and crew mission, that enables NASA to do the hard stuff-like go BEO.”
For once you got it right, but for the wrong reasons. Yes, NASA should handle the hard-stuff like going BEO. Just not with SLS, but by building a true spaceship such as Nautilus.

BTW. If you are talking about going to the moon, that is not Beyond Earth Orbit. The moon is orbiting earth. It is beyond Low Earth Orbit.

“Ron: a lot of the anger, acrimony, and bitterness could’ve been avoided.”

When you cancel a $200B program people are not dispassionate about it, and some (like you) will hate the decision no matter how much fiscal sense it makes. And you continue to relive the moment far longer than Congress has.

Let’s remember that after all that kerfuffle and mock rage Congress didn’t even debate the cancellation – they agreed completely. The only part they had a problem with was the loss of jobs, and that’s why they created the SLS. Entirely understandable from a political standpoint, but still a complete waste of taxpayer money.

“Said it before, and I’ll repeat: If NASA can get two commercial providers to handle the ISS cargo and crew mission, that enables NASA to do the hard stuff-like go BEO.”

Uh, no, you haven’t been saying that. But if you want to believe that you have, fine, as maybe that means you have seen the light and you now believe that the SLS is a complete waste of time and taxpayer money.

“But will the program that emerges be purely EELV/Depot or purely SLS?”

NASA and the aerospace industry already know that the SLS is not needed for exploration and that fuel depots can get us out exploring quicker and for far less money. Why you’re against that is unfathomable…

“Some depots, along with the 70 Ton SLS variant are what we’re likely to see.”

Congress doesn’t want the 70 ton SLS, they want the 130 ton SLS, which is an even bigger waste. Try to keep up with the news.

“As long as the key committees in Congress have members from the “space states”, they have to be satisfied. Or you won’t fly anywhere.”

I don’t know about you but I fly on commercial transport wherever I go, so I don’t have to worry about getting Congress to fund each flight I take. Same can’t be said about the SLS, whose status will hang in the balance every year when the Appropriations committees take up the NASA budget.

All it will take is one budget committee to put the SLS out of it’s misery – we’re taking bets on which year it will be. Want to join the pool?

“What should have Hall asked His Majesty Musk? Plenty. First…”

Those aren’t hard questions – they sound more like questions somebody interviewing Musk for a magazine article would ask. In fact Musk has already talked about three of your four questions, and the fourth one is just plain weird. You asked:

“Second, does he have any plans to undercut NASA’s BEO activities or offer BEO exploration under contract to NASA?”

Undercut NASA’s BEO activities? Are you making that up? How could anyone “undercut” NASA’s BEO activities without Congress allowing it, in which case it wouldn’t be an “undercut”.

Is your real question will Congress allow the commercial space industry to become the sole provider of launch services for NASA? Because the commercial space industry already builds everything for NASA, so what’s to undercut? The “profit” for collecting Moon rocks? The profit from discovering new stars?

The second part of that question was more sane – “or offer BEO exploration under contract to NASA?” – and maybe you haven’t kept up with the news, but NASA has been looking at using SpaceX for low cost Mars exploration.

Apparently your rage and anger over anything Musk and SpaceX has blinded you to the fact that Musk has stated on numerous occasions that he is building SpaceX to be a transportation company. If you’re having trouble understanding what that means, go ask someone that is more dispassionate than you.